If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Tuscon Bee Diet

The following article discusses CCD in terms of a "Perfect Storm" scenario. Of particular interest is bee nutrition, and there's a reference to the Tucson Bee Diet which sounds like a supplement or substitute, and will be marketed late this summer as "Megabee".
I can't find diddly squat about this product in my searching. Anyone know more about it?

"MegaBee, also called the Tucson Bee Diet, will first be distributed to major
honeybee supply houses in 50-pound bags. Beekeepers then add their own
sugar syrup to the mix. Pound for pound, the supplement is more digestible
than natural pollen, Wardell says."

I'm a bit confused. The article states that the product has been in development for over 4 years, and that it was tested in '06-'07 and would be on the market last month. I can't seem to find even a current reference to it. What happened?

"After four years of research, a new bee supplement called MegaBee is ready for production, with plans for market availability by August 2007. Available as a liquid and in a patty form, the new supplement is likely to be manufactured at Yuma, Ariz.

“MegaBee was tested last fall and winter (2006-2007) on bee colonies getting ready to go into almonds. It was a good time to test because there wasn’t much out there for bees to forage on. Essentially they were living off the MegaBee diet. Results look very good,” DeGrandi-Hoffman says."

"MegaBee, also called the Tucson Bee Diet, will first be distributed to major honeybee supply houses in 50-pound bags. Beekeepers then add their own sugar syrup to the mix. Pound for pound, the supplement is more digestible
than natural pollen, Wardell says."

Anyone know what supply houses have it??

I suppose if one were ambitious enough they could decipher the patent application and mix up their own batch...

The USDA-ARS researcher which came up with the diet (using our tax dollars and private beekeeper funds) is now the head of the company selling the product. A first as far as i have ever heard of. Another beekeeper parasite? What some beeks are saying. In the Midwest we very rarely need pollen substitue. In fact we are pulling full frames of fresh pollen. Maybe we should toss those and buy the bagged stuff if as the USDA-ARS researcher says fresh pollen is inferior to his product?
Also all we have seen so far in print has been his ravings about the product. California beeks have been experimenting with the product for a few years and most I have spoke with are not as excited about the product as the maker but I am only saying what I am being told.
I think the first marketing MISTAKE is to say the bagged stuff trumps fresh pollen. Give me a break!

The USDA-ARS researcher which came up with the diet (using our tax dollars and private beekeeper funds) is now the head of the company selling the product. A first as far as i have ever heard of.

I don't know about the USDA, but spin-off of government research happens all of the time - on state and federal levels.

I'm certain that there are "good" and "bad" pollen types, many plants might not by themselves meet nutritional needs. The patent linked above has a rather loose range of protein, etc. levels indicated, and it appears that the researchers have used egg protein (albumen, rather than adding the fat of yolk?) to their mix. Using a protein that is easily digestible (proper amino acid ratio/levels profile) for use in feeding the developing brood is the critical factor. Most substitutes are using double the protein that are available in pollen, but if that protein substitute is not easily assimilated in the hive, it is not effective. Be interesting to see how well the product works.

Dadant has a new supplement coming out and I would guess it's this one by the sales pitch I got from Jerry at the florida branch a couple of weeks ago.
I hope it is as good as they say, we sure are lacking for a true artificial supplement.It all comes down to $ and cents, your not going to hinder the bees by using it.
We're in the 21 century, Purina can tell you exactly what your gerbal and paraket need ,but we don't know the exact needs of the bee which is ,according to the USDA responsible for 75 billion dollars of direct and indirect effect of our food stuffs .
Go figure!!

Keith,
Thats right. I researched at the first signs of CCD, bee nutrition. At that time, I did not know it, but DeGroot in 1953 profiled the nutritional requirments of bees. So the protein levels, the amino acid files, and the like have been around for 54 years.

Do we ask for nutrition levels on the stuff were asked to buy? Do beekeepers educate themselves and know what their bees are feeding on and the basis for nutrition health.

I was shocked at the lack of information in the written modern beekeeping books. I have said many times that several things will come about because of CCD. I think better understanding and a rash of "new" products on the market will be right around the corner.

But lets see.......

The last "scientific formulated" bee sub marketed just recently has 36.4% protein with an amino acid isoleucine level of 2.1%. And several other amino acid level less then 50% of whats needed. Anyone want to do the math and guess if this feed is as good as they say? Of course at 51.8% sugar, they sure can market that the bees "eat it up!"

It will be interesting to see with the new found interest and the beekeeping community becoming increasingly aware of what bee sub should have as a nutritional basis, if any last minute "tweeks" are in the works. Or will it be just another bee sub added to the list of crap we have already seen.

Sounds like "feed bee" all over again. That stuff was hyped up and promoted to be as good as or better than natural pollen. I tried it and what a joke, bees wouldn't even touch it. You couldn't pay me to feed the stuff now.